Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 132 posts

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#101

Post by diebeforei485 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #29
KptMarchewa wrote: post #12

They are offering free upgrades to newer versions of operating system instead. The only case where you're not getting it is when your laptop has been EOLed by Apple, which is effectively the same thing.

To note, 32bit compat has been discontinued with Catalina, so people who kept an old version around for that purpose are SOL. Moving to a virtualized instance is an option, but then I wonder how PITA it is to keep the virtual one secure.

What are these 32-bit apps people seem to keep running?

If they are games, Boot Camp is an option on Intel macs, and CrossOver [1] is an option on Apple Silicon.

https://applesilicongames.com/games

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#102

Post by makeitdouble »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #101
makeitdouble wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To note, 32bit compat has been discontinued with Catalina, so people who kept an old version around for that purpose are SOL. Moving to a virtualized instance is an option, but then I wonder how PITA it is to keep the virtual one secure.

What are these 32-bit apps people seem to keep running? If they are games, Boot Camp is an option on Intel macs, and CrossOver [1] is an option on Apple Silicon. https://applesilicongames.com/games

I personally gave up on an old Lightroom version that was pre-CS cloud, and could see more professional people clinging to specific version of apps for whatever reason (private plugins, specific Apple scripts, standardized manual procedures etc.).

There must also be enterprise software that still weren’t recompiled or the vendor went under or threw the towel.

Those are a minority, but sadly we see that on every breaking change.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#103

Post by smoldesu »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #100
smoldesu wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My a1502 still has Mojave, and I'm not planning on returning to MacOS until they reinstate 32-bit support. It feels like I'm screaming into the void when I tell other people about this, they almost always just shrug their shoulders and say something along the lines of "the Twitter app still works though".

32-bit support is not coming back, and nor should it. Having a mix of apps means having both 32-bit and 64-bit copies of system libraries loaded in memory all the time, which is inefficient. For security reasons, you probably should partition your Mac, run Catalina or Big Sur* on your main partition with your personal stuff, PGP keys, and other important things, and have a separate partition with Mojave for your lega…

Oh, I don't really care about MacOS that much. I've already moved on to Linux, which has much better support for games and legacy software (along with the development I do every day for, y'know, work). I just keep the old lappy on Mojave because it reminds me of better times. I never really do anything beyond basic text editing on it anymore.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#104

Post by mrtesthah »

smoldesu wrote: post #92
sgt wrote: post #23

I'm still running Mojave. Never found the time to upgrade. Ridiculous, I know. Anyone else in the same boat?

My a1502 still has Mojave, and I'm not planning on returning to MacOS until they reinstate 32-bit support. It feels like I'm screaming into the void when I tell other people about this, they almost always just shrug their shoulders and say something along the lines of "the Twitter app still works though".

Apple is more likely to discontinue support for x64_64 altogether in favor of arm64e than they are to bring back 32bit support. Rosetta v1 didn’t last long when transitioning from PowerPC.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#105

Post by sneak »

smoldesu wrote: post #93
sneak wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could run Mojave or Catalina on my brand new 16". It came with Monterey, which is ugly. Whoever thought light grey text on dark grey background was a good or reasonable UI choice should be fired. It's the Windows XP Home of operating systems.

The biggest thing preventing me from upgrading to Big Sur+ is how ugly the UI is. Gone are the elegant, sleek windows of old, replaced by bubbly flat sheets and weird, incongruous menu systems. It feels like Apple was taking the piss out of the GNOME desktop and then forgot to press the "we're just joking" button before they shipped it.

It's possible that the key product people that were responsible for making macOS useful for those other than the iPhone/YouTube generation have mostly moved on from product leadership inside of Apple, whether due to changing priorities, retirement, being sidelined inside of what I am internally mentally referring to as Apple 3.0, or just getting fed up with the tacky panhandler-esque push toward services revenue at all costs, et c.

The GNOME comment is spot on. Unfortunately while the screen and cpu/gpu/apu is amazing in the new M1P/M rMBP16, it is also one of the ugliest laptops Apple has ever shipped. (The best thing they did to the overall design of the iPhone recently, hardware specs aside, was to go back to making the rounded bubble 10/11 be like the 6 in the 12/13, which, despite being an improvement, is a reversion to the past. I also can't tell the difference in the design of the 12 and 13.)

This seriously does not bode well for people who deeply appreciate simple beauty in their daily-use tools.

I was spoiled over the last decade or so of my laptop being of extremely high performance/quality AND ALSO completely unnecessarily fucking gorgeous. Now it's an ugly grey brick. I hope those days aren't over forever.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#106

Post by whywhywhywhy »

Incredibly short sighted when they shipped so many laptops with 128GB drives even till quite recently where upgrading is almost impossible once you've been using the machine because even basic apps and a few files push you beyond the limit required to update.

Most of these laptops run at 2-4GB free space because MacOS already takes up a ton of space and throw on a few electron apps and its full.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#107

Post by bmarquez »

sschueller wrote: post #28

They also never bothered to implement the 2 factor code popup on old systems but forcing user to use 2fa. So you now get to explain to grandma that she needs to enter her icloud password, get a password error, click on approve on her iPhone, then enter her password again with the 6 digit code shown on the iphone appended to the end of her password.

I've also seen the "append the 2fa code at the end of your password" trick work for other older products that only have one input box. An example is the discontinued Amazon Kindle Windows UWP app.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#108

Post by Riseed »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #100
smoldesu wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My a1502 still has Mojave, and I'm not planning on returning to MacOS until they reinstate 32-bit support. It feels like I'm screaming into the void when I tell other people about this, they almost always just shrug their shoulders and say something along the lines of "the Twitter app still works though".

32-bit support is not coming back, and nor should it. Having a mix of apps means having both 32-bit and 64-bit copies of system libraries loaded in memory all the time, which is inefficient. For security reasons, you probably should partition your Mac, run Catalina or Big Sur* on your main partition with your personal stuff, PGP keys, and other important things, and have a separate partition with Mojave for your lega…

(I'm not the person to whom you were replying)

One of my "important things" is a 32-bit app required for a freelance project. This freelance project also requires some 64-bit apps, so I don't see how two partitions would help here. Am I missing something? (Sincere question -- I'm looking for a new solution because I know Mojave won't be supported forever.)

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#109

Post by smoldesu »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #106

Incredibly short sighted when they shipped so many laptops with 128GB drives even till quite recently where upgrading is almost impossible once you've been using the machine because even basic apps and a few files push you beyond the limit required to update. Most of these laptops run at 2-4GB free space because MacOS already takes up a ton of space and throw on a few electron apps and its full.

I pity the people who bought one of those thinking they could install Xcode and still have room for a couple movies afterwards.

Re: Apple isn’t patching all the security holes in older versions of macOS

#110

Post by wl »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #101
makeitdouble wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To note, 32bit compat has been discontinued with Catalina, so people who kept an old version around for that purpose are SOL. Moving to a virtualized instance is an option, but then I wonder how PITA it is to keep the virtual one secure.

What are these 32-bit apps people seem to keep running? If they are games, Boot Camp is an option on Intel macs, and CrossOver [1] is an option on Apple Silicon. https://applesilicongames.com/games

WXtoImg is what I miss the most. There’s a long tail of unsupported old software with unique capabilities.
Post reply on HN